Diversity remains a big problem in cardiology—here’s how educators can help
While approximately 13% of all practicing cardiologists in the United States are women, just 6% are underrepresented minorities (URMs). Experts agree that cardiology programs at the country’s medical schools can help address this issue—but what steps can be taken to make a real difference?
According to a new analysis in Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, the key is to “operationalize diversity enhancement efforts with urgency, as if lives are at stake.” Because, the authors emphasized, “we are convinced that they are.”
“Given recent information that URM and women physicians may enhance the quality of care provided to a diverse patient population in the U.S., it is imperative that we enhance diversity in our workforce,” explained co-authors Claire S. Duvernoy, MD, University of Michigan Medical School in Ann Arbor, and Quinn Capers IV, MD, The Ohio State University College of Medicine in Columbus.
The analysis included several straightforward suggestions that could potentially go a long way toward making cardiology a much more diverse specialty. One strategy, for example, is to ensure every student is paired with a mentor who can help them make career decisions. The current system, the authors explained, is bad for introverts who may not be comfortable finding a mentor on their own. Another suggested strategy is training employees to understand how implicit biases impact every decision they make, whether they happen to be assessing applications or “scoring” an interview.
“A recent study showed that the majority of a medical school admissions committee had implicit white race preference, but that after undergoing annual bias mitigation training, the medical school began matriculating classes that mirror the diversity of the patient population in the U.S,” the authors wrote. “Training in holistic review and implicit bias mitigation works best if the selection committee is a fixed group of individuals—a captive audience for training and education.”
Including diversity in school mission statements and implementing more flexible leave policies also made the team’s list of potential ways to improve diversity at U.S. institutions.
The authors also noted that, as of July 2020, the Accreditation Council of Graduate Medical Education will even demand that programs work to improve diversity—not complying will result in a citation.
Duvernoy and Capers concluded by linking their connections with recent events in the United States, highlighting that educators can be a part of the solution.
“Current national and world events like the novel coronavirus pandemic, which has disproportionately affected African Americans, and frequent episodes of police brutality leading to fatal encounters between police and black Americans have ignited a worldwide call for equity and justice,” the authors wrote. “The cardiology community can answer this call by working to dismantle processes that have resulted in a persistent lack of diversity in our specialty.”
The full analysis, including a list of suggestions from the co-authors, is available here.
Michael has more than 18 years of experience as a professional writer and editor. He has written at length about cardiology, radiology, artificial intelligence and other key healthcare topics.